Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Protocol
  • Published:

Efficient and safe single-cell cloning of human pluripotent stem cells using the CEPT cocktail

Abstract

Human pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs) are inherently sensitive cells. Single-cell dissociation and the establishment of clonal cell lines have been long-standing challenges. This inefficiency of cell cloning represents a major obstacle for the standardization and streamlining of gene editing in induced pluripotent stem cells for basic and translational research. Here we describe a chemically defined protocol for robust single-cell cloning using microfluidics-based cell sorting in combination with the CEPT small-molecule cocktail. This advanced strategy promotes the viability and cell fitness of self-renewing stem cells. The use of low-pressure microfluidic cell dispensing ensures gentle and rapid dispensing of single cells into 96- and 384-well plates, while the fast-acting CEPT cocktail minimizes cellular stress and maintains cell structure and function immediately after cell dissociation. The protocol also facilitates clone picking and produces genetically stable clonal cell lines from hPSCs in a safe and cost-efficient fashion. Depending on the proliferation rate of the clone derived from a single cell, this protocol can be completed in 7–14 d and requires experience with aseptic cell culture techniques. Altogether, the relative ease, scalability and robustness of this workflow should boost gene editing in hPSCs and leverage a wide range of applications, including cell line development (e.g., reporter and isogenic cell lines), disease modeling and applications in regenerative medicine.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Live-cell imaging of acutely dissociated hPSCs.
Fig. 2: Cell morphology and cell adhesion profile of dissociated hPSCs after treatment with Y-27632, CloneR or CEPT.
Fig. 3: CEPT improves single-cell cloning efficiency and maintains pluripotency.
Fig. 4: Scalable single-cell cloning workflow for hPSCs.
Fig. 5: Live-cell staining and microfluidic single-cell dispensing of hPSCs.
Fig. 6: Karyotype analysis, WES and multilineage differentiation of clonal cell lines.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The main data discussed in this protocol were generated as part of the studies published in the supporting primary research papers in refs. 31,32. Whole-exome files have been deposited to the Sequence Read Archive under BioProject PRJNA552890.

References

  1. Thomson, J. A. et al. Embryonic stem cell lines derived from human blastocysts. Science 282, 1145–1147 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Takahashi, K. et al. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from adult human fibroblasts by defined factors. Cell 131, 861–872 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Shi, Y., Inoue, H., Wu, J. C. & Yamanaka, S. Induced pluripotent stem cell technology: a decade of progress. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 16, 115–130 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Sharma, A., Sances, S., Workman, M. J. & Svendsen, C. N. Multi-lineage human iPSC-derived platforms for disease modeling and drug discovery. Cell Stem Cell 26, 309–329 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Evans, M. J. & Kaufman, M. H. Establishment in culture of pluripotential cells from mouse embryos. Nature 292, 154–156 (1981).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Pal, R. A small-molecule cocktail that beats cellular stress. Nat. Methods 18, 457–458 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Xu, R. H. et al. Basic FGF and suppression of BMP signaling sustain undifferentiated proliferation of human ES cells. Nat. Methods 2, 185–190 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Ludwig, T. E. et al. Feeder-independent culture of human embryonic stem cells. Nat. Methods 3, 637–646 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Ludwig, T. E. et al. Derivation of human embryonic stem cells in defined conditions. Nat. Biotechnol. 24, 185–187 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Chen, G. et al. Chemically defined conditions for human iPSC derivation and culture. Nat. Methods 8, 424–429 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Rodin, S. et al. Clonal culturing of human embryonic stem cells on laminin-521/E-cadherin matrix in defined and xeno-free environment. Nat. Commun. 5, 1–13 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Levenstein, M. E. et al. Basic fibroblast growth factor support of human embryonic stem cell self-renewal. Stem Cells 24, 568–574 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Garitaonandia, I. et al. Increased risk of genetic and epigenetic instability in human embryonic stem cells associated with specific culture conditions. PLoS ONE 10, 1–25 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Barbaric, I. et al. Time-lapse analysis of human embryonic stem cells reveals multiple bottlenecks restricting colony formation and their relief upon culture adaptation. Stem Cell Rep. 3, 142–155 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Watanabe, K. et al. A ROCK inhibitor permits survival of dissociated human embryonic stem cells. Nat. Biotechnol. 25, 681–686 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Ohgushi, M. et al. Molecular pathway and cell state responsible for dissociation-induced apoptosis in human pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 7, 225–239 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Chen, G., Hou, Z., Gulbranson, D. R. & Thomson, J. A. Actin–myosin contractility is responsible for the reduced viability of dissociated human embryonic stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 7, 240–248 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Barbaric, I. et al. Pinacidil enhances survival of cryopreserved human embryonic stem cells. Cryobiology 63, 298–305 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Xu, Y. et al. Revealing a core signaling regulatory mechanism for pluripotent stem cell survival and self-renewal by small molecules. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 8129–8134 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Chen, Y. H. & Pruett-Miller, S. M. Improving single-cell cloning workflow for gene editing in human pluripotent stem cells. Stem Cell Res. 31, 186–192 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Singec, I. et al. Defining the actual sensitivity and specificity of the neurosphere assay in stem cell biology. Nat. Methods 3, 801–806 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Paull, D. et al. Automated, high-throughput derivation, characterization and differentiation of induced pluripotent stem cells. Nat. Methods 12, 885–892 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Howden, S. E., Thomson, J. A. & Little, M. H. Simultaneous reprogramming and gene editing of human fibroblasts. Nat. Protoc. 13, 875–898 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Doudna, J. A. The promise and challenge of therapeutic genome editing. Nature 578, 229–236 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Yumlu, S. et al. Gene editing and clonal isolation of human induced pluripotent stem cells using CRISPR/Cas9. Methods 121–122, 29–44 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Merkle, F. T. et al. Human pluripotent stem cells recurrently acquire and expand dominant negative P53 mutations. Nature 545, 229–233 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Roberts, B. et al. Systematic gene tagging using CRISPR/Cas9 in human stem cells to illuminate cell organization. Mol. Biol. Cell 28, 2854–2874 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Andrews, P. W. et al. Assessing the safety of human pluripotent stem cells and their derivatives for clinical applications. in. Stem Cell Rep. 9, 1–4 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Ihry, R. J. et al. p53 inhibits CRISPR–Cas9 engineering in human pluripotent stem cells. Nat. Med. 24, 939–946 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Li, X. L. et al. Highly efficient genome editing via CRISPR–Cas9 in human pluripotent stem cells is achieved by transient BCL-XL overexpression. Nucleic Acids Res. 46, 10195–10215 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Chen, Y. et al. A versatile polypharmacology platform promotes cytoprotection and viability of human pluripotent and differentiated cells. Nat. Methods 18, 528–541 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Tristan, C. A. et al. Robotic high-throughput biomanufacturing and functional differentiation of human pluripotent stem cells. Stem Cell Rep. 16, 3076–3092 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Ortmann, D. & Vallier, L. Variability of human pluripotent stem cell lines. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 46, 179–185 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful for the support from the Regenerative Medicine Program (RMP) of the NIH Common Fund, NIH HEAL Initiative and in part by the intramural research program of the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), NIH. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and data analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. We are also thankful to the NIH Medical Arts Design Section for preparing Fig. 4.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

C.A.T. and I.S. conceived the project and designed the protocol. C.A.T. performed the experiments with help from H.H., Y.J., Y.C., C.W., P-H.C., S.R. and V.M.J. I.H. and T.C.V. performed the 3D rendering data analysis. Data analysis and discussions were done by all authors. C.A.T. and I.S. wrote the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Carlos A. Tristan or Ilyas Singeç.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

I.S., Y.C. and A.S. are co-inventors on a US Department of Health and Human Services patent application covering the CEPT cocktail and its use.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Protocols thanks Andreas Kurtz, Jeanne Loring, Ai Zhang and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Related links

Key references using this protocol

Chen, Y. et al. Nat. Methods 18, 528–541 (2021): https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-021-01126-2

Tristan, C. A. et al. Stem Cell Rep. 16, 3076–3092 (2021): https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stemcr.2021.11.004

Supplementary information

Source data

Source Data Fig. 2

Cell roundness and impedance data.

Source Data Fig. 3

% Cloning efficiency, growth rate confluency and cell survival data.

Source Data Fig. 6

Unprocessed western blots.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tristan, C.A., Hong, H., Jethmalani, Y. et al. Efficient and safe single-cell cloning of human pluripotent stem cells using the CEPT cocktail. Nat Protoc 18, 58–80 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41596-022-00753-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41596-022-00753-z

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing